After this spring semester ends, newly-graduated GW students will start receiving letters in the mail asking them to give back to their alma mater. But will they choose to donate? The answer to this question is an important one for the institution’s future.

Low alumni giving negatively impacts our endowment. The university’s $1.3 billion endowment, which includes alumni giving, commercial properties, and financial investments, isfar smallerthan universities it considers its peers. In 2012, poor market conditionsdecreased the endowmentby $25 million. Alumni giving specificallydropped by 14 percent last year, an important statistic as the university fundraises for the$275 millionScience and Engineering Hall and a$400 millionstrategic plan. These challenges have forced GW to disproportionately rely on tuition increases to fuel additional university spending increases.

1) High student debt: GW students graduate with higher than average debt burdens. The average GW student’s debt burdenis $33,398, which is higher than the averageat other American private universities, where students graduate with an $27,650 of debt on average. Especially in a tough job market, former students may find themselves with little left to give back.

2) Frustration with tuition increases: The University’s sticker price has increased 3% every yearfor the past six years, and students may feel that they have already given enough money to the school.

3) Perceptions that university spending priorities are misplaced: Many recent graduates feel that there is not enough financial transparency and engagement with students about the future of finances at GW. Frustration is possible, especially when funds for large construction projects could be best spent elsewhere.

Why is this a problem? Because in order to avoid future tuition increases, boost our financial aid pool, and invest in important academic programs, we need to grow our endowment. All stakeholders--university officials, current students, and alumni--agree that this is a major issue.

Our school’s financing system does have its benefits. GW is one of the few schools in the country that guarantees fixed tuition and the same amount of merit aid for five years. This policy was established in 2004 by the Board of Trustees, in response to national backlash to the pricey cost of a GW education.

While fixed tuition is an important way to give students and parents financial confidence, continued tuition increases have not stopped. GW is a tuition dependent school. 62% of revenuecame from tuition in the University’s last fiscal year, and among all of GW’s 14 peer schools, GW’s percentage of tuition dependence is a stark second-highest. This high-tuition, high-discount model is unsustainable, as eventually the price will reach a threshold that will keep students from attending. Our endowment matters.

Clearly lackluster alumni giving presents a problem that needs to be tackled. Although GW is an excellent institution of higher learning, high debt burdens, inflating costs, and widespread sentiment that school spending choices are not often in student best interests, might cause many to put off donating back to their alma mater. To achieve the “season of giving” that our institution needs, university leaders should understand that current and future alumni may be holding back for important reasons.

As the semester draws to a close, we reflect on the revelation that occurred earlier this year that brought the University yet again to the national media spotlight: GW had been misrepresentingits financial aid policy as “need-blind” for years. Although it is disappointing that our school was not transparent about this in the past, it is important to understand why GW can’t have a need blind policy in the first place.

College tuition has been on the rise nationwide for the past several decades, skyrocketing higher than both inflationandmedian household incomes. Many students graduate with substantial debt burdens, with collective student debt now over $1 trillion. At GW, former university President Stephen Trachtenberg increased tuition from $25,000 to $51,000 during his 19 years as president, leaving GW while it was the most expensive university in the country. Trachtenberg accomplished this primarily by spending more money to make the school seem like it had a higher value. "People equate price with the value of their education," he said in an interview with The Atlantic comparing it to a company that sells cheap vodka upgrading the packaging in order to charge a higher price.

Despite some optimistic signs of increased focus on providing financial aid, this trend of higher tuition and higher university spending hasn't stopped (see Infographic). The University has not ceased fromincreasing tuition and room and board costsby about 3% per year. Recent large investments in dorm construction, including the$130 million superdorm, and revelations about the $600,000 price tag for the logo change, show that continued increases in costs of attendance increase right alongside the money the school spends on revamping its image.

However, on face value, increased tuition does have an upside: new revenue from full-paying students can, in theory, subsidize increased financial aid. Despite well intentions, the problem with charging high tuition costs for some to increase the financial aid packages of others is that it becomes an unsustainable model. After it was discovered to have misrepresented its need aware policies, the school released a press release, writing “Our need-aware admissions policy enables the university to provide more attractive aid packages for students with financial need while staying within our aid budget.” The underlying problem is that GW isn’t investing enough money to provide financial aid to more students. The fund for undergraduate aid actually decreased last year by $1.9 million, despite the more than 10% increase in request for assistance by students. Providing more aid is difficult for the University in part because only 11.24%of its relatively-low endowment is available for aid purposes.

More importantly, though, financial aid can’t keep up with continued increases in tuition. As college sticker prices rise, it becomes even more challenging for the institution to find ways to make up the difference. Because of this gap in funds, GW is forced to be need-aware and to take a student’s ability to pay into account when deciding whether to admit or wait list them.

What then should be done? Aside from increasing our endowment through new alumni giving campaigns, GW could decrease non-academic spending. University finances do not operate in a vacuum; conscious decisions are made on what priorities are funded. The Innovation Task Force, a program that solicits input from the GW community on ways for the school to increase revenue and cut costs, has attempted to find new ways to save money. However,recent reportsshow the process has slowed and will not likely meet its target.

While it may mean making difficult and controversial decisions, GW needs to make curbing non-academic spending a priority. We can never become a need-blind university until we accept that spending increases propelled by raising tuition costs are making our education less accessible to those who need it.

Are you interested in helping increase financial transparency here on campus? GW Not For Profit wants to hear your story for an upcoming media campaign!

We're looking for students who have had issues with the financial aid department, feel left out of the discussion surrounding financial decisions, or have suggestions for how the school can improve this process.

Email gwnotforprofit@gmail.com if you're interested in doing a video testimonial. We'll be setting up several interview dates in January.We are also looking for students with past video production or graphic design experience. Shoot us an email if you are interested in helping create this project.

Our organization was recently quoted in an Al Jazeera America articleon our reaction to the recent change in the University financial aid policies.

Zach Komes, 19, a sophomore economics major at GW who is the lead organizer of the student group GW Not for Profit, which was formed in 2011 out of concern for rising tuition and funding transparency, said in an emailed statement that "it’s positive to know that this policy change has finally been made public.

"The new openness is a positive sign that Provost Koehler values transparency," added Komes. "However, the root cause of this shift in policy is the dramatic increase in university spending, fueled by large tuition hikes, in the past few decades. Many students have grown frustrated that tuition hikes have tended to fund large capital construction and renovation projects rather than financial aid and improved academics.”

We believe this perception of misaligned spending priorities is best mitigated through increased financial transparency and student engagement. Read more about our solutionand stay tuned for new developments.

This recent closing of Gelman highlights the need for funds to be spent on improving infrastructure vital to academic needs and not on improving the outward appearance of buildings. The university is currently spending upwards of $16 million to change from which direction you walk into the building in addition to renovating the second floor. Meanwhile, the air conditioning system is unable to effectively cool the building which forces the building’s closure and eliminates hundreds of thousands of square feet meant to be dedicated for student space. While the rapid change in weather is certainly uncharacteristic, Georgetown University and American University had no such closures in the same time period. It is unheard of that a research institution must shut the doors to its main library during the academic year “due to excessive heat”. This calls into question the priorities of the university and how the administration chooses which buildings receive renovations and in which order. “The way Trachtenberg saw it, selling George Washington over the other schools was like selling one brand of vodka over another. Vodka, he points out, is a colorless, odorless liquid that varies little by maker. He realized the same was true among national private universities: It was as simple as raising the price and upgrading the packaging to create the illusion of quality.” It is ironic that our library seems to be most significant building on campus untouched by this “illusion of quality” and that tours for prospective students avoid entering undoubtedly due its poor state. The emphasis needs to be on improving the academic experience of current students and not solely on improving the illusion of quality for prospective students.

After we read that a university in Canada was offering free tuition to students who could make a half-court shot we thought why not at GW? Instead of a formal proposal to the Athletic Department we took it straight to Athletic Director Patrick Nero via Twitter.

@gwnfp thanks to your suggestion we are set for free tuition contest this Saturday.Thanks for the input.

He let us know he would look into it and within 2 weeks he has made this suggestion into reality! This Saturday at 4pm, at the Men's Basketball game, a lucky student will be chosen from the crowd to take one half-court shot. Hear the swish, and the academic year is on GW! Maybe it could be you!